Journal of Software Engineering and Applications, 2014, 7, 779-790

Published Online August 2014 in SciRes. http://www.scirp.org/journal/jsea

http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/jsea.2014.79072

An Improved Framework for Requirement

Change Management in Global Software
Development
Nasir Mehmood Minhas, Qurat-ul-Ain, Zafar-ul-Islam, Atika Zulfiqar
University Institute of Information Technology, PMAS Arid Agriculture University, Rawalpindi, Pakistan
Email: nasirminhas@uaar.edu.pk, quratulain.352.se@gmailcom, zafarislam65@gmail.com,
aatika80@hotmail.com

Received 22 June 2014; revised 20 July 2014; accepted 15 August 2014

Copyright 2014 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc.

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution International License (CC BY).
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

Abstract
In this research, an improved framework for requirement change management in global software
development (RCM_GSD) has been presented. The objective is to manage the change in require-
ment specifically in global software development in an appropriate manner. The proposed frame-
work RCM_GSD follows the required processes of RCM and reduces the concerns of GSD. Systemat-
ic Literature Review (SLR) was conducted for exploration of relevant research. During literature
study, it is analyzed that the existing techniques of change management were not suitable for
global software development (GSD). The change in requirements becomes more complicated in
distributed environment due to the lack of communication and collaboration among globally dis-
persed stakeholders. The proposed model is compared with other models proposed in recent li-
terature and analysis is made between them; feedback was obtained from the domain experts as
well. The feedback and comparison results show that the proposed model provides an appropriate
solution for requirement change management in GSD.

Keywords
Requirement Change Management (RCM), Global Software Development (GSD), Requirement
Engineering

1. Introduction
Requirement Change Management (RCM) is the process of interpreting, managing, analyzing, controlling, trac-
ing and documenting changes in requirements. It is necessary to fulfill the changing needs of stakeholders for

How to cite this paper: Minhas, N.M., Qurat-ul-Ain, Zafar-ul-Islam and Zulfiqar, A. (2014) An Improved Framework for Re-
quirement Change Management in Global Software Development. Journal of Software Engineering and Applications, 7,
779-790. http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/jsea.2014.79072
N. M. Minhas et al.

success of software systems, as a result, the changing requirements becomes challenging [1]. Among the largest
issues of distributed software development Requirement Engineering (RE) faces many obstacles [2].
Global Software Development (GSD) is gaining the more attraction of the software industry throughout the
world. During the 1990s, the differences in development cost, the limited pool of work force, the necessity to get
closer to customer and round the clock development, force the organizations to outsource their projects [3].
Due to the high rate of distributed projects, it becomes important to understand the nature of such type of
software development [4] [5]. Organizations adopt the global software development because of the attractive
features it offers. These are having a large pool of skilled workers, cheap labor or low salary cost, quick forma-
tion of virtual corporation/teams, to respond to severe pressure, to improve time to market [6] [7]. At the same
time, teams are facing some real problems as well, while handling distributed projects. According to Aranda et
al. [8] distance is the major problem in global software development and it introduces difficulties in globally
distributed projects.
Moreover, different time zones, languages and cultures introduce communication problems in globally distri-
buted teams [9]; to make changes in the requirements is a complicated activity [10] [11]. Requirement change
management becomes more challenging while dealing with distributed projects due to the difficulties of com-
munication among the dispersed stakeholders [12]. The lack of proper management of changing requirements
leads towards the failures of software systems; the process of change management is worthwhile as well as
challenging at the same time [13]. Requirements change management is the collaboration intensive process, in
distributed environment, the informal meetings of stakeholders are not possible, and due to which requirement
change management becomes a serious issue [14]. The management of changing requirements is very important
for the success of software systems. The changing requirements are not problematic; the real problem is that
how to manage these changes [15] [16].
For this particular study the exploration of literature is mostly discovered about the concerns of global soft-
ware development. Later on, more investigation is made upon the process of requirement change management in
the global work environment of software development. These areas are not exhaustively viewed, instead of this
only focused and relevant literature is taken as deep study.
This paper presents the problems that are being faced by the stakeholders in a distributed development envi-
ronment during the change management process. Existing change management techniques have been investi-
gated and features/limitation of these processes has been highlighted. Systematic literature review (SLR) me-
thodology has been used for the said investigations. On the basis of these investigations an improved framework
has been suggested to overcome the problems with respect to the change management process. A comparison of
the proposed model and two existing models from the recent literature is also the part of this article.
The remaining paper is organized as: Section 3 presents the methodology, Section 4 presents the proposed
framework, and Section 5 presents results and discussion.

2. Methodology & Research Questions

The methodology used for working on this particular paper is initiated from the systematic literature review of
related work. For conducting SLR research questions are formalized, review planning is done and final review is
conducted. The SLR investigated the RCM issues in GSD. The investigated literature is critically analyzed that
identified the problem region. That problem is minimized by the proposal of a framework. Further implementa-
tion and validation of the proposed work is performed.

2.1. Review Protocol

The primary purpose of the study is to discover the challenges faced during the RCM process in GSD and find
out the techniques designed to manage the change in the GSD environment. For this purpose the research papers
only selected from 2000 to onwards 2013. The studies before 2000 were not selected also the search is limited to
only the papers written in English language.

2.2. Search for Studies

During the process of finding the relevant studies the following search string was used:
((Requirements change management OR Requirements engineering OR Requirements change management

780
 N. M. Minhas et al.

techniques) AND << in >> (Global software development OR Distributed software development OR Offshore
software development OR outsourcing)).

2.3. Study Selection Criteria

The search scheme confined the following selections:
Searched databases were IEEE Explorer, Springer Link and ACM Digital Library. Google Scholar (Google
scholar is taken as it is the important source for collecting the literature from different journals and conferences).
Searched items were Journal articles, workshop papers and conference papers. Language: Our search limited to
the papers written in English. Publication period: Since 2000 to onwards.
The research papers before 2000 are not included in the review the reason behind is that the GSD phenomena
rapidly spread in the 21st century and research before 2000 is not much relevant to this subject. The study selec-
tion is performed to identify with relevance for the objective of the systematic review.

2.4. Methodology
The SLR helps to conduct the literature review in the formal way and also facilitate, to identify, interpret, and
evaluate the existing research concerning a particular topic or research question. The SLR methodology pro-
posed by Kitchenham [17] has been followed in this research. Figure 1 presents the overall research design fol-
lowed to complete this work. Detail of SLR is given in Table 1, while Table 2 presents the results from differ-
ent sources. SLR results are further elaborated in Graph1 and Graph 2.
The graphical and tabular representation of the above mentioned description is shown below:

2.5. Research Questions

Three questions have been established to investigate through literature, these questions are as follows:
RQ1: What are the problems faced during the RCM in GSD environment?
RQ2: Are the existing techniques of RCM suitable to manage the change in GSD environment?

Figure 1. Research design followed.

781
N. M. Minhas et al.

Table 1. Study selection criteria.

Relevance Analysis Inclusion Criteria Papers Left
Only English papers
Selection based on a search string Only published papers 375
Onwards to 2000
No tutorials and
chapters 295
Selection based on titles No duplicates
Title contains the search string fully or part of it 123
Focus on global software development
Selection based on abstracts Requirements change management processes 54
Problems/challenges of global software development
Findings based on some empirical data or case study analysis
Study selection based
Challenges of RE or RCM in global software development 45
on full text focus
Requirements change management techniques in global software development

Table 2. Number of results per source.

IEEE Digital Library ACM Springer Google Scholar
Total Found 201 51 47 75
Candidate Studies 74 7 10 31
Primary Studies 22 3 1 10

Graph 1. Number of results per sources.

Graph 2. Percentile of selected and excluded studies from the

total.

RQ3: Is there any effort made to design RCM framework for GSD environment?
RQ3.1: What are the modalities of such frameworks?

782
 N. M. Minhas et al.

RQ3.2: What are the limitations of such framework?

3. GSD Challenges
GSD challenges identified from the literature have been presented in Table 3. Major challenges emerged from the
literature are related to communication, coordination and control. Major issues presented in ([1] [12] [14]
[18]-[24]) can be summarized as, distance, different time zones, different cultures, language differences, trust.
Detail description can be seen in Table 3.

Table 3. GSD Challenges.

Challenges
References Communication Coordination Control

Lack of face to face meetings

Time zones
Gabriela N. Aranda1 et al., Time zones
Cultures Not defined
2010 [8] Cultures
Lack of time overlaps
Languages

Languages
Process management
Lopez, 2009 [10] Time zone Communication patterns
Communication medium

Lack of synchronization tools Cultures

Time zones Time zone
Damian, 2007 [11] Not defined
Cultures Remote communication
Distance difficulty

Cultures
Languages
Sultana R, et al., 2012 [18] Trust Not defined Not defined
Time zone
The identification of real need

Lack of face to face meetings Cultures Inconsistency in work practices

Smite, 2006 [14] Languages Diversity in process maturity
Lack of awareness Not defined Lack of tameness

Time zones
Kumar et al., 2011 [19] Cultures Not defined Lack of synchronization
Distance

Trust and sharing Gaps in communication groups

Rafael Prikladnicki Standardization of artifacts
Cultures Alignment of software
et al., 2007 [20] Lack of tameness
Languages development techniques

Lack of leadership and skills

Time zones
Berenbach, 2006 [21] Not defined Lack of central guidance
Cultures
Multiple chain of command

Face to face meetings difficult

Culture
Lack of awareness Face to face meetings difficult
Sabahat et al., 2010 [22] Not defined
Language Developers start assuming
Trust
Time zones

Anne Hoffmann et al., 2010 No standard formats of documentation Lack of informal Communication styles
[23] Different processes followed communication Languages

Time zones Artifacts in incompatible formats

Javed et al., 2010 [24] Not defined
Cultures Task allocation

783
N. M. Minhas et al.

4. RCM in GSD Frameworks

GRCM [10] have decreased the coordination and communication issue for handling process of change which is
ultimately good sign for GSD but the flow of work regarding change management is not effectively managed in
this model.
The GlobReq model proposed by Niazi in [12] is related to the management of global requirements. They im-
proved the process of requirement engineering for distributed software development.
A model is proposed by Kumar & Kumar in [14] regarding the RM issues faced during DSD. They processed
the RM work through ontology for management of knowledge. But they do not mention the way of dealing with
the repository, the way of communication is not defined properly.
Rabia [18] suggests that there is a stronger need for effective requirements change management process dur-
ing global software development. The change management process is more difficult to deal in distributed envi-
ronment due to the less communication and coordination issues. The model likely covers all the activities of
RCM but there is one limitation that the model proposed not validated. It has not proved that either the proposed
framework is effective to manage the change in a globally distributed development. Moreover, the model not
able to show that how the communication problem would be resolved in the distributed setting.
Sinha [19] proposes a tool EGRET (Eclipse based global requirements tool) to make the proper knowledge,
understanding and to manage requirements change in distributed software development environment. The case
study result shows that with the make use of the tool, the requirements can be communicated more frequently.
Most of the practitioners found the features of the tool useful.
Khan [25] proposed the framework for requirements change management specifically for global software de-
velopment. The framework covers the necessary activities of the RCM process in addition, the framework pro-
posed for RCM in GSD but not address the GSD issues raised in managing the change like different cultures and
languages, Lack of collaboration, inadequate communication.
Ansari [26] author presented the agile extreme programming approach to manage the requirements in distri-
buted software development. They proposed model and tool to implement the XP in DSD.
The RCM model for GSD environment proposed by Hussain in [27] doesnt minimize the dependency of
coordination and communication for the complete process of change management.
Lai [28] proposed ontology based requirement architecture repository for managing the requirements man-
agement activity in globally dispersed environments. However, the process of requirements change management
presented is not complete, the alternate scenarios of change not presented. Some RCM activities are not men-
tioned properly.
Hussain et al. [29] presented the change management process. The change management process starts with
initiation of change requests; the change proposal is available to all stakeholders. The second step is the need for
software for handling the change. The third is to determine the impact of the requested change. It is the most
important activity in the change management process, identifying the consequences of the requested change and
budget estimation in order to implement the requested change. After identifying these three steps, the consoli-
dated framework of the change management process defined. Bhatti [30] proposed a formal change management
process. The tasks of each stakeholder specified at each step. The first step is initiation of change; the change
request arrives at this step. Once the request received, then its processed through the entire change management
process.
A detailed summary highlighting the description and limitations of RCM approaches proposed for GSD is
presented in Table 4.

5. Proposed Framework for RCM in GSD

In a distributed environment, the informal meetings of stakeholders are not possible, due to which the changing
requirements becomes a serious issue [14]. In the global software development environment, communication is
badly affected due to the distance between the sites, different time zone, and the difference in language and cul-
ture. Due to the distribution of sites the communication rate becomes lower which have harmful effects like re-
duction of informal face to face communication and decreased communication [32]. In the exploratory phase it
has been learned that existing models of requirement change management are not fit for use in the global soft-
ware development environment due to communication and its correlated problems ([14] [25] [32]-[35]). There-
fore an improved RCM model is needed, the said model should have an ability to cope with the GSD issues spe-

784
 N. M. Minhas et al.

Table 4. Summary of RCM approaches for GSD.

Approach Description Limitation

The process of requirements change

Proposed an ontology based requirement,
A requirements management method management presented is not complete,
an architecture repository for managing the
for Global Software Development the alternate scenarios of change not
requirements management activity in the
Lai et al., 2013 [15] presented. Some RCM activities are not
globally dispersed environment.
mentioned properly.

The framework proposed specifically for

Proposed model for requirement
change management in GSD
Sultana et al., 2012 [18]
A Proposed RCM framework for globally
RCM in GSD, the validity of the framework
distributed environment which cover the
not approved. Different cultural and time
maximum RCM activities with the use of a
zone issues not addressed in the proposed
central repository for sharing the knowledge
framework, these issues are problematic in
among n sites
GSD environment and need to address.

Some practitioners analyze that the time of

EGRET Developed a tool for enhanced collaboration the change in requirements not notified that
Sinha et al., 2006 [19] in requirements change management would lead towards rework and delay in
closing the change

The framework proposed in the paper lacks

RCM framework in GSD
Khan et al., 2012 [25]
the various change management activities
like change analysis, change impact analysis,
A framework proposed for handling the
validation, verification, alternate scenarios
communication issues faced during RCM in
in the framework are missing.
GSD, which covers the activities like change
The framework proposed for GSD but
initiation, evaluation and implementation
not address the GSD issues like different
cultures and languages, Lack of collaboration,
inadequate communication

The agile technique extreme programming

Requirements management using Agile approaches need more collaboration
used to manage the requirements in a
XP which cannot be effectively achieved in a
distributed context. A model and tool
Ansari et al., 2010 [26] distributed setting
developed for RM using XP in DSD

The approach presented for requirements

Requirements tracing based tracing not address the major issues of GSD,
The proposed model for requirements
approach which are cultural, time zone,
tracing by adding the stakeholder value
Heindl et al., 2006 [31] communication issues
(Barkha Javed et al., 2010 )

cially communication and its correlated areas. The proposed model is presented below in Figure 2.
In the initiation phase, change request is raised from any site through any stakeholder. The change is accepted
in the Change Request Form (CRF) and most of the time change is raised from the client side. The framework
provides the multilingual support in the case if any stakeholder is not familiar with the common language. The
change request form contains the information regarding the change request, complete contact details of the in-
itiator and complete detail of the change request.
After the CRF filled, it will be submitted and recorded in the RCM Database for further processing. In the
next step of proposed framework, the change evaluation is performed by analyst along with the help of require-
ments repository that contain information regarding system requirements. The evaluation is made for estimation
of cost, time, and resource utilization by the requirement analyst. The evaluation result is again recorded in
RCM database.
The notification is generated to all the Change Control Board (CCB) members.
For voting on the evaluation results and the threshold is defined for getting feedback from CCB members.
The voting results are processed for all CCB members, agree or disagree for acceptance of change for imple-
mentation.
The decision about acceptance of change or rejection is decided on the feedback of voting results generated
by all CCB members. If all members agreed on the evaluation results, change is considered accepted and ap-
proved for implementation else rejected. The final result of CCB decision is recorded in RCM database and all
sites are notified about it.

785
N. M. Minhas et al.

Figure 2. Proposed RCM Framework for GSD.

5.1. Phase 1: Change Initiation

The initial step covers the change initiation phase. The change control process starts when the request for change
is arises. The change request can be initiated from any of the distributed sites and any stakeholder can initiate
the request for change. Normally, the request arises from client side; however the process is flexible to involve
all the sites to initiate the request. The change will be requested by filling the Change Request Form. The
change request form contains the information regarding the change request, complete contact details of the in-
itiator and complete detail of the change request. Once the CRF filled, it will be submitted and the data regard-
ing the change request will be recorded in the RCM DB for further processing.

5.2. Phase 2: Change Evaluation Process

In the next step, the Change Evaluation is performed. As the request is received the change manger notified and
starts the evaluation process. Change Evaluation performed automatically to reduce the chances of communica-
tion. The results of the change evaluation process recorded in the RCM DB and the CCB members take a deci-
sion on the results either to implement the change or not.

5.3. Phase 3: Voting Process

This step is started after the evaluation results recorded in the RCM DB. The voting process is the core compo-
nent of the framework. The threshold time will be defined to get the feedback from all the CCB members within
the time. All CCB members will give their feedback on the change evaluation results that either they are agreed
or disagreed with the requested change. If any member didnt respond within the threshold time, then the new
threshold time defined to get the feedback from all of the members. All the CCB members have the same level
of priority so it is essential to get feedback from each CCB member to decide either to implement the change or
not.

786
 N. M. Minhas et al.

6. Evaluation of Proposed Framework

The RCM_GSD framework has been evaluated by two different methods.
1) Evaluation through industrial stakeholder feedback on the basis of case study results
2) Evaluation through comparison with the existing literature based frameworks.

6.1. Evaluation through Case Study

To validate the proposed RCM_GSD framework, we selected two companies operating in Global Software De-
velopment and RCM_GSD framework was tested on two GSD based projects and on the basis of the results,
stakeholders given us the feedback on a pre-specified questionnaire based form. The goal was to evaluate the
performance of our proposed framework in the real world environment.

6.2. Evaluation through Comparison

The objective of this evaluation was to validate RCM_GSD on the basis of two criteria.
1) RCM activities covered
2) GSD issues resolved
The assessment is made, thats how well the framework is developed and resolves the matters of requirements
change management in Global Software Development. The literature based comparison is performed to accom-
plish this objective.
The comparison is made upon the basis of parameters defined for traditional RCM. The framework must fol-
low the required activities of RCM and reduces the challenges occur during Global Software Development.
Two techniques have been selected from the literature and the comparison of RCM_GSD has been made
with these techniques. Various frameworks or techniques have been proposed in the literature to manage the
change, but the reason to choose these techniques [18] [25] for comparison is that these are specifically designed
for RCM in GSD.

7. Results and Discussion

The proposed model is implemented as RCM_GSD Framework and validated through case study. The case
study is passed through the developed system. Many relevant cases are elaborated by this process.
The literature based comparison was performed to express that how well the proposed framework fit for re-
quirements change management in Global Software Development. The activities list identified from Imtiaz et al.,
2008 [36] in order to compare the activities for the purpose of comparison and the GSD issues was also hig-
hlighted from the literature.
The comparison was performed on the proposed framework with the exiting RCM techniques in term of the
two parameters: one is the activities and the other is the GSD issues covered.
Two existing techniques selected from the literature for comparison with proposed framework [18] [25] is se-
lected for comparison because these techniques are specifically designed for RCM in GSD. The observation il-
lustrates some spots in the model that need to work out for enhanced efficiency. The graph below shows the
comparison results.
Graph 3 presents the comparison of RCM_GSD with the existing frameworks on the basis of RCM activities,
results show that the proposed framework covers the maximum six activities along-with the framework of Rabia
Sultana. Similarly, in Graph 4 GSD issues covered by any framework could be observed; proposed framework,
covered the maximum issues as compared to rest of the two frameworks.
From these results it can be concluded that the proposed RCM_GSD covers the maximum activities and espe-
cially overcomes the issues faced due to the distributed development environment (highlighted from literature)
specifically identified factors due to the communication effects in a distributed environment.
As it has been mentioned, we also have taken the feedback from experts regarding framework effectiveness
and applicability. Feedback form could be concluded in three major sections. First section can be interpreted as:
does that RCM_GSD save effort and time? Second section concluded the level of satisfaction of experts, while
in third section it has been estimated that whether RCM_GSD reduces the face to face communication or not.
The results of experts feedback are being presented in Graph 5. Only one stakeholder showed his dissatisfac-
tion on RCM_GSD, three remained neutral, while four stakeholders were satisfied. The majority of experts agreed

787
N. M. Minhas et al.

Graph 3. Number of activities covered RCM frameworks in

GSD.

Graph 4. Number of issues covered by RCM frameworks in

GSD.

Graph 5. Results of feedback questionnaire.

that RCM_GSD saved effort and time, only one stakeholder remained silent on this issue; at the same time, ex-
erts agreed that RCM_GSD reduced the face to face communication, only two remained neutral in this regard.

8. Limitations and Future Work

There are some limitations found in the proposed framework in this paper. The effort should be made upon the
decision phase of Requirement Change Management. So that in future this framework is possible improved from

788
 N. M. Minhas et al.

decision making perspective along with few other addressable areas.

References
[1] Iqbal, J., Ahmad, R. and Noor, M.A. (2013) A Framework to Improve the Requirements Engineering Process for
Software Development Outsourcing. 22nd Australian Software Engineering Conference, Melbourne, 4-7 June 2013,
137-144. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ASWEC.2013.25
[2] Assawamekin, N. (2010) An Ontology-Based Approach for Multi Perspective Requirements Traceability between
Analysis Models. 2010 IEEE/ACIS 9th International Conference on Computer and Information Science (ICIS), Kami-
noyama, 18-20 August 2010, 673-678.
[3] Carmel, E. (1999) Global Software Teams: Collaborating Across Borders and Time Zones. Prentice Hall, PTR.
[4] Lopez, A., Nicolas, J. and Toval, A. (2009) Risks and Safeguards for the Requirements Engineering Process in Global
Software Development. IEEE Conference on Global Software Development, Limerick, 13-16 July 2009, 394-399.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ICGSE.2009.62
[5] Niazi, M., El-Attar, M., Usman, M. and Ikram, N. (2012) GlobReq: A Framework for Improving Requirements Engi-
neering in Global Software Development Projects. 4th IEEE International Conference on Global Software Engineering,
Ciudad Real, 14-15 May 2012, 166-170.
[6] Casey, V. and Richardson, I. (2009) Implementation of Global Software Development: A Structured Approach. Soft-
ware Process Improvement and Practice, 14, 247-262. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/spip.422
[7] Conchuir (2009) Global Software Development: Where Are the Benefits? Communications of the ACM, 52, 127-131.
[8] Aranda, G.N., Vizcano, A. and Piattini, M. (2010) Analyzing and Evaluating the Main Factors that Challenge Global
Software Development. The Open Software Engineering Journal, 4, 14-25.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2174/1874107X01004020014
[9] Khan, S.U., Niazi, M. and Ahmad, R. (2009) Critical Barriers for Offshore Software Development Outsourcing Ven-
dors: A Systematic Literature Review. Proceedings of 16th IEEE Asia-Pacific Software Engineering Conference, Pe-
nang, 1-3 December 2009, 79-86.
[10] Hussain, W. and Clear, T. (2012) GRCM: A Model for Global Requirements Change Management. 2nd International
Requirements Engineering Efficiency Workshop (REEW 2012), Essen, 19 March 2012.
[11] Smite, D. (2006) Requirements Management in Distributed Projects. Journal of Universal Knowledge Management, 1,
69-76.
[12] Damian, D.E. and Zowghi, D. (2003) RE Challenges in Multi-Site Software Development Organizations. Require-
ments Engineering Journal, 8, 149-160. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00766-003-0173-1
[13] Hussain, W. (2010) Requirements Change Management in Global Software Development: A Case Study in Pakistan.
[14] Kumar, S.A. and Kumar, T.A. (2011) Study the Impact of Requirements Management Characteristics in Global Soft-
ware Development Project: An Ontology Based Approach. International Journal of Software Engineering and Appli-
cation, 2, 107.
[15] McGee, S. and Greer, D. (2009) A Software Requirements Change Source Taxonomy. 2009 4th International Confe-
rence on Software Engineering Advances, Porto, 20-25 September 2009, 51-58.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ICSEA.2009.17
[16] Pierce, K., Ingram, C., Bos, B. and Ribeiro, A. (2013) Experience in Managing Requirements between Distributed Par-
ties in a Research Project Context. 2013 IEEE 8th International Conference on Global Software Engineering (ICGSE),
Bari, 26-29 August 2013, 124-128.
[17] Kitchenham, B., Brereton, O.P., Budgen, D., Turner, M., Bailey, J. and Linkman, S. (2009) Systematic Literature Re-
views in Software EngineeringA Systematic Literature Review. Information and Software Technology, 51, 7-15.
[18] Sultana, R., Fahad, J., Ahmad, M. and Ahmad, A. (2012) Empirical and Qualitative Studies by Analyzing Requirement
Issues in Global Software Development (GSD). International Journal of Management, IT and Engineering, 2, 1-18.
[19] Sinha, V., Sengupta, B. and Chandra, S. (2006) Enabling Collaboration in Distributed Requirements Management.
IEEE Software, 23, 52-61. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/MS.2006.123
[20] Prikladnicki, R. (2007) Distributed Software Development: Practices and Challenges in Different Business Strategies
of Offshoring and on Shoring. ICGSE 2007 2nd IEEE International Conference on Global Software Engineering, Mu-
nich, 27-30 August 2007, 262-274. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ICGSE.2007.19
[21] Berenbach, B. (2006) Impact of Organizational Structure on Distributed Requirements Engineering Processes: Lessons
Learned. Proceedings of the 2006 International Workshop on Global Software Development for the Practitioner,
Shanghai, 23 May 2006, 15-19. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/1138506.1138511

789
N. M. Minhas et al.

[22] Sabahat, N., Iqbal, F., Azam, F. and Javed, M.Y. (2010) An Iterative Approach for Global Requirements Elicitation: A
Case Study Analysis. 2010 International Conference on Electronics and Information Engineering (ICEIE), 1, 361-366.
[23] Hoffmann, A. and Lescher, C. (2009) Collaboration and Intercultural Issues on Requirements: Communication, Under-
standing and Softskills (Circus). 2009 Collaboration and Intercultural Issues on Requirements: Communication, Un-
derstanding and Softskills, Atlanta, 31-31 August 2009, 1-4.
[24] Javed, B. and Minhas, S.S. (2010) Process Support for Requirements Engineering Activities in Global Software De-
velopment: A Literature Based Evaluation. 2010 International Conference on Computational Intelligence and Software
Engineering (CiSE), Wuhan, 10-12 December 2010, 1-6.
[25] Khan, A.A., Basri, S., Dominic, P.D.D. and Amin, F. (2012) A Propose Framework for Requirement Change Manage-
ment in Global Software Development. International Conference on Computer & Information Science (ICCIS), 2, 944-
947.
[26] Ansari, A.K., Sharafi, S.M. and Nematbakhsh, N. (2010) A Method for Requirements Management in Distributed Ex-
treme Programming Environment. Journal of Theoretical and Applied Information Technology, 20, 52-58.
[27] Ramzan, S. and Ikram, N. (2006) Requirement Change Management Process Models: Activities, Artifacts and Roles.
IEEE Multitopic Conference, INMIC 06, Islamabad, 23-24 December 2006, 219-223.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/INMIC.2006.358167
[28] Lai, R. and Ali, N. (2013) Requirements Management Method for Global Software Development. Advances in Infor-
mation Sciences (AIS), 1, 38-58.
[29] Hussain, S., Ehsan, N. and Nauman, S. (2010) A Strategic Framework for Requirements Change in Technical Projects:
Case Study of a R & D Project. 2010 3rd IEEE International Conference on Computer Science and Information Tech-
nology (ICCSIT), 5, 354-358.
[30] Bhatti. M.W., Hayat, F., Ehsan, N., Ahmed, S., Ishaque, A. and Mirza, E. (2010) A Methodology to Manage the Chan-
ging Requirements of a Software Project. 2010 International Conference on Computer Information Systems and Indu-
strial Management Applications (CISIM), Krackow, 8-10 October 2010, 319-322.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/CISIM.2010.5643642
[31] Heindl, M. and Biffl, S. (2006) Risk Management with Enhanced Tracing of Requirements Rationale in Highly Distri-
buted Projects. International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE), Shanghai, 20-28 May 2006, 20-26
[32] Herbsleb, J D. and Moitra, D. (2001) Global Software Development. Software. IEEE Software, 18, 16-20.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/52.914732
[33] Prikladnicki, R., Audy, J. and Evaristo, R. (2003) Requirements Management in Global Software Development: Preli-
minary Findings from a Case Study in a SW-CMM Context. Proceedings of 2nd International Workshop Global Soft-
ware Development, Cape Town, 1-8 May 2010, VENUE University of Victoria.
http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/versions?doi=10.1.1.156.2838
[34] Dev, H. and Awasthi, R. (2012) A Systematic Study of Requirement Volatility during Software Development. IJCSI
International Journal of Computer Science Issues, 9, 527-533.
[35] Pena, M.E. (2010) A Study of the Causes of Requirements Volatility and Its Impact on Systems Engineering Effort.
COSYSMO Workshop, Center of Software and System Engineering, Annual Research Review, 11 March 2010.
[36] Imtiaz, S., Ikram, N. and Imtiaz, S. (2008) A Process Model for Managing Requirements Change. ACST08 Proceed-
ings of the 4th IASTED International Conference on Advances in Computer Science and Technology, Langkawi, 2-4
April 2008, 121-128.

790